Geez, Why The Nate-Bashing, Folks?

[ABM]

I've been reading a fair amount of posts in here, and other sites, that seem to question Nate's play calling, substitution patterns, and/or general coaching ability.

My gosh, guys, we're nearly halfway through the season and may very well be all alone in first place in the NW Division (depending on the Nuggets' outcome) tonight.

I mean, aren't we already at, or above, the point where anybody might have thought we'd be at this juncture?

Personally, I don't get it.

 

[Natebishop3]

I've been reading a fair amount of posts in here, and other sites, that seem to question Nate's play calling, substitution patterns, and/or general coaching ability.

My gosh, guys, we're nearly halfway through the season and may very well be all alone in first place in the NW Division (depending on the Nuggets' outcome) tonight.

I mean, aren't we already at, or above, the point where anybody might have thought we'd be at this juncture?

Personally, I don't get it.

We're moving into the "playoff contender" status ABM. We want to win. Some of us are not convinced that Nate is the coach that will take us to the next level. There's no reason to beat around the bush. I like Nate, but I think he's sub-par as far as x's and o's.

 

[oldmangrouch]

I'm still of the opinion that much of the Nate bashing comes from an inflated view of how good the roster is.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Do not confuse Nate bashing with Nate criticism.

Besides, that's what this forum is for.

 

[ABM]

We're moving into the "playoff contender" status ABM. We want to win. Some of us are not convinced that Nate is the coach that will take us to the next level. There's no reason to beat around the bush. I like Nate, but I think he's sub-par as far as x's and o's.

So, then, what's wrong with 1st in the Pacific and 4th seed in the WC as a start???

 

[ABM]

Do not confuse Nate bashing with Nate criticism.

Besides, that's what this forum is for.

You suck. Deal with it. That's what this forum is for.

 

[The Sebastian Express]

It's criticism of his offensive and defensive schemes. If you're okay with an offense that largely depends on one player iso'ing and the pick and roll with little to no motion otherwise, kudos to you. Many of us are not and realize in the playoffs the other teams will largely take away our over-reliance on the Roy iso and make us pay for it dearly.

 

[ABM]

It's criticism of his offensive and defensive schemes. If you're okay with an offense that largely depends on one player iso'ing and the pick and roll with little to no motion otherwise, kudos to you. Many of us are not and realize in the playoffs the other teams will largely take away our over-reliance on the Roy iso and make us pay for it dearly.

Yeah, tell that to Boston.

 

[Tince]

Criticizing a coach takes the least amount of thought and effort, that's why it's common place on every message board. Most people don't want to take the time and energy needed to really think critically, therefore they come up with things that in retrospect haven't worked out perfectly.

 

[The Sebastian Express]

Yeah, tell that to Boston.

Hey cool, be blind to Nate's flaws and what he needs to improve. If you don't want to get the most out of the team that's fine with me, but don't get uppity at those of us who want this team to win multiple championships.

 

[Stevenson]

Wherever you go, fans seem to bash the coaches. When I was in Sac, Adelman was bashed. Here it was Mo, and now Nate, (though Mo deserved it!)

Geez, we start 3 rookies, beat the world champs, and are in 1st place. I say Nate is doing a heck of a job!

 

[ABM]

Hey cool, be blind to Nate's flaws and what he needs to improve. If you don't want to get the most out of the team that's fine with me, but don't get uppity at those of us who want this team to win multiple championships.

Uppity? Hardly. Just voicing my opinion, as well. As I said at the outset, we're probably further along than most would have expected us to be at this point. This, with a regular starter (Martell) injured.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Criticizing a coach takes the least amount of thought and effort, that's why it's common place on every message board. Most people don't want to take the time and energy needed to really think critically, therefore they come up with things that in retrospect haven't worked out perfectly.

Bingo! Every message board. Sad but true any very annoying. Nothing wrong with playing the arm chair QB and disagreeing with the coaches decision. That is part of message boards. But IMO the fans that go to the extreme of blaming everything on a coach (and I mean EVERYTHING) is exactly what you said.......lazy and quite frankly not the most credible poster.

Now don't get me wrong I am not talking specifically about this board. I surf a lot of sites in a lot of different sports. And almost every single one has certain posters that think the coach has to go. Which means there are about 5 coaches out there that are considered good. So if we fire the one we have, I still am not sure who we hire, because apparently they suck too.

 

[Denny Crane]

<table class="sortable stats_table" id="CHI"><tbody><tr style="" onmouseover="hl(this);" onmouseout="uhl(this);" class=""><td csk="jacksph01c:1992" align="left">
</td> </tr> <tr style="" onmouseover="hl(this);" onmouseout="uhl(this);" class=""> <td align="left">1990-91</td> <td align="left">NBA</td> <td align="left">Chicago Bulls*</td> <td align="right">61</td> <td align="right">21</td> <td align="right">.744</td> <td align="right">1</td> <td align="right">8.57</td> <td align="right">114.6</td> <td csk="105.2" align="right">105.2</td> <td csk="1:4:1991" align="left">Won Finals</td> <td csk="jacksph01c:1991" align="left">Jackson (61-21)</td> </tr> <tr style="" onmouseover="hl(this);" onmouseout="uhl(this);" class=""> <td align="left">1989-90</td> <td align="left">NBA</td> <td align="left">Chicago Bulls*</td> <td align="right">55</td> <td align="right">27</td> <td align="right">.671</td> <td align="right">2</td> <td align="right">2.74</td> <td align="right">112.3</td> <td csk="109.0" align="right">109.0</td> <td csk="0:3:1990" align="left">Lost Eastern Conference Finals</td> <td csk="jacksph01c:1990" align="left">Jackson (55-27)</td> </tr> <tr style="" onmouseover="hl(this);" onmouseout="uhl(this);" class=""> <td align="left">1988-89</td> <td align="left">NBA</td> <td align="left">Chicago Bulls*</td> <td align="right">47</td> <td align="right">35</td> <td align="right">.573</td> <td align="right">5</td> <td align="right">2.13</td> <td align="right">109.1</td> <td csk="107.7" align="right">107.7</td> <td csk="0:3:1989" align="left">Lost Eastern Conference Finals</td> <td csk="collido01c:1989" align="left">Collins (47-35)</td> </tr> <tr style="" onmouseover="hl(this);" onmouseout="uhl(this);" class=""> <td align="left">1987-88</td> <td align="left">NBA</td> <td align="left">Chicago Bulls*</td> <td align="right">50</td> <td align="right">32</td> <td align="right">.610</td> <td align="right">2</td> <td align="right">3.76</td> <td align="right">109.0</td> <td csk="105.5" align="right">105.5</td> <td csk="0:2:1988" align="left">Lost Eastern Conference Semifinals</td> <td csk="collido01c:1988" align="left">Collins (50-32)</td> </tr> <tr style="" onmouseover="hl(this);" onmouseout="uhl(this);" class=""> <td align="left">1986-87</td> <td align="left">NBA</td> <td align="left">Chicago Bulls*</td> <td align="right">40</td> <td align="right">42</td> <td align="right">.488</td> <td align="right">5</td> <td align="right">1.27</td> <td align="right">108.6</td> <td csk="107.6" align="right">107.6</td> <td csk="0:1:1987" align="left">Lost Eastern Conference First Round</td> <td csk="collido01c:1987" align="left">Collins (40-42)</td></tr></tbody></table>

 

[Pinwheel1]

^So you are saying we should hire Phil Jackson? I thought he had a job.

 

[Denny Crane]

^So you are saying we should hire Phil Jackson? I thought he had a job.

Nah, just saying sometimes a coach gets you to the finals where you lose, and he's still not THE ONE.

 

[Natebishop3]

Nah, just saying sometimes a coach gets you to the finals where you lose, and he's still not THE ONE.

Exactamundo.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Exactamundo.

So who's the one?

 

[ABM]

So who's the one?

Bill Cowher.

 

[Public Defender]

Like most coaches dealing with a young team, McMillan is dealing with more variables than the average coach, because he's still learning (and the players themselves are still learning) what they're capable of. The only guy he knows he can depend on is Brandon Roy, though lately, Blake and Przybilla have been pretty dependable, too (though the three of them aren't going to win games entirely on their own). That means McMillan has to constantly push guys, maneuver new lineups, etc. in order to win. And he's done that, overall, remarkably well. He's made some big mistakes (like playing LaMarcus Aldridge and Brandon Roy too many minutes), but overall, I'd give him at least a B+, probably an A, for some games.

 

[SnakeOiler]

Nah, just saying sometimes a coach gets you to the finals where you lose, and he's still not THE ONE.

The example you provide is ONE time, which is not even close to sometimes. Face it you love to bitch. It sucked a few years ago. Remember?

 

[Denny Crane]

The example you provide is ONE time, which is not even close to sometimes. Face it you love to bitch. It sucked a few years ago. Remember?

I don't know if Nate is THE ONE or not. He doesn't bother me as coach in the least. However, I can see where other people might think he's not THE ONE, which is fair.

 

[Minstrel]

Nah, just saying sometimes a coach gets you to the finals where you lose, and he's still not THE ONE.

Yeah, or it could be one coach doesn't have Jordan, Pippen and Grant in their primes and one does.

Don't get me wrong, I think Phil Jackson is a great, great coach and considerably better than Doug Collins. But there was more going on than just a coaching change that led from playoff failures to playoff (ultimate) success.

In some sense, the same thing could happen to Nate McMillan if he were fired as some fans seem to want. He has a lot of pre-prime talent...the next coach could come along, end up coaching the talent in their primes and succeed more and people would say, "Yup, poor old McMillan...good coach, but not a coach who can get a team over the hump."

 

[ABM]

IIRC, Nate refused to sign an extension because he wanted to "prove" himself over the course of his current contract. That's stand-up stuff right there. I'm gonna give him the benefit of any doubt.

 

[Ed O]

IIRC, Nate refused to sign an extension because he wanted to "prove" himself over the course of his current contract. That's stand-up stuff right there. I'm gonna give him the benefit of any doubt.

Really? He's a guy who left Seattle on bad terms in spite of having spent his whole career there. I'm not convinced that his reluctance to sign an extension is based on wanting to prove himself... I find it more likely he'll want options as a free agent coach.

Which isn't a criticism of him. He should do what he thinks is right for himself.

Ed O.

 

[STOMP]

Nah, just saying sometimes a coach gets you to the finals where you lose, and he's still not THE ONE.

other times your core players come into their prime years and with added experience play better. I'm glad he didn't because he's annoying enough as is, but I'm pretty sure that Collins could have won championships with prime time MJ Pip & Horace too.

This Blazer club is doing better then most expected and probably a decent amount of credit should go to Nate for the way he manages the day to day stuff. Keeping guys focused on producing in their roles and playing hard every night isn't a given. He's balancing the minutes of a lot of deserving players and seems to have their respect. The players may eventually tune him out or possibly outgrow his message as that happens to most coaches, but he seems to have created an environment where the youngins are thriving so I doubt he's going anywhere else soon.

STOMP

 

[Blazer_Hippie]

Really? He's a guy who left Seattle on bad terms in spite of having spent his whole career there. I'm not convinced that his reluctance to sign an extension is based on wanting to prove himself... I find it more likely he'll want options as a free agent coach.

Which isn't a criticism of him. He should do what he thinks is right for himself.

Ed O.

Yeah, I tend to think he didn't want an extension because he and/or his agent believe he'll be worth more after this season. It's not like a player, where there is injury risk. His risk is limited to having an awful season where the team melts down...not a huge risk given the talent. And his upside due to the negotiating leverage he'll get if we make the playoff, etc. is pretty strong. Shrewd move on his part.

 

[ABM]

The players may eventually tune him out or possibly outgrow his message as that happens to most coaches, but he seems to have created an environment where the youngins are thriving so I doubt he's going anywhere else soon.

STOMP

I Agree with that. He's the right coach at this point in time. If, at some point, the "experienced" players begin to tune him out, then I want Adelman back.

That said, (essentially echoing Ed O.'s remarks,) perhaps this is part of the reason Nate didn't sign an extension. Meaning, if he leaves, he wants it to be on his terms.

 

[Blazer_Hippie]

Nate isn't going anywhere. He's staying in Portland and he's gonna get paid.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I don't think it's necessarily guaranteed, Hippie. I think it's conceivable that he checks out all of his options and finds one where he's not butting heads with a rock-star GM on personnel and team style. He'll get paid either way, especially by a team (MEM or MIN, perhaps) that has young talent to develop.

His son's already off to college, and I think he's daughter's right behind. I don't know that there's much keeping him tied to the NW if something else comes along. Heck, even CHA might need a Brown replacement in a couple of years.